You can use the terms "and" & "or" in your search; "or" phrases are resolved
first, then the "and" phrases. For example, searching for "black hole and
galaxy or universe" will find articles that have the phrase "black hole" in them
and also have either "galaxy" or "universe" in them. Please note that other
search syntax like quote marks, hyphens, etc. are not currently supported.

When you view web pages with matches to your search, the terms you searched for will be highlighted in yellow.

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

The numerous facets of time that highlight its character have been well described in the book About Time by Paul Davies from Viking 1995. Nevertheless, many aspects of time still attract vigorous debate. This essay is a very serious attempt to offer several steps towards resolving time via quantum pseudokinematics. Quantum pseudokinematics is discrete (contiguous) motion as opposed to smooth (continuous) motion. It arises as the false motion linked to the time ordered accumulation of primal spatial locations – these equate with dimensionless points. Everything emerges as spatial symmetries. The union of spatial symmetries creates matter. These concepts rest on discoveries made after running computer trials based on early string theory, but designed to investigate a problem noted by Richard Feynman, see Lectures Vol II, pp12.12 et seq. The model grew from notions inspired by Gabrielle Veneziano in 1968. Its penultimate gift is a parameter-free mass-line generating algorithm that exactly reproduces fundamental particle properties based on quantum pseudokinematics. This essay provides overwhelming evidence for the discrete nature of time and discrete material existence in general.

Author Bio

Myke Stanbridge studied medicine/electronics in the military and laser propagation under Zuev. He joined ACS and NYAS in 1973 and SXRT in 1975. He is now R&D Manager with Stantronics Research. Interests include high energy chemistry and physics, with an emphasis on their quantum aspects...

Well written with nice pictures. My physics is a bit rusty, but it looks very important. Is it what you would call a theory of everything?

Maria.

Tony Ferrero wrote on Nov. 22, 2008 @ 09:58 GMT

I believe that this paper is not based on rigorous definitions and on a consistent mathematical background. A description of the principles and the assumptions could help. At the present time, the problem of the nature of time in this Contest is correctly focussed only by Kiefer, Prati and Rovelli.

Myke wrote on Nov. 24, 2008 @ 06:59 GMT

Given that you are more creative than critical, perhaps you should offer an essay before the deadline. It could compare and contrast the essays presented here, notwithstanding the rather limited time and space available for a presentation of that kind. In defence of my work, it apparently requires more from you than you realise on a cursory reading. Please try again!

Alex Nelson wrote on Nov. 26, 2008 @ 19:37 GMT

Gah I've been busy as a bumbled bee, but two questions come to mind...

1) Time appears to emerge in some relationship to surface area, which in turn emerges as more pixels are plotted, which in turn requires time. This intuitively appears inconsistent...how is such an inconsistency avoided?

2) Both time and mass appear to come in discrete packets, if we adopt the intuition that they are "particles" that are "created", can't we also adopt the same intuition that they can be "annihilated"? Doesn't this result in violating the second law of thermodynamics?

Congratulation to Stanbrige, which has a vote/time derivative 6 times that of Rovelli. (see attached jpg)

I believe that self-voting is not a good practice.

I'd like to know the ratio between downloads and votes, and whether multiple votes came from the same IP. I'd also like to know if multiple submission came from a single IP, so a dummy alterego could vote the main contribution as a participant, since self voting is not allowed for restricted votes. I'd also like to know if members of FQXi are allowed to vote twice, as participants and as members.

Hi, don't know who you are, but a curious point. I have no idea what you are talking about! Your graph looks like you may be confusing me with Stoica... Anyways, there are odd things happening here - three people who have posted their comments say that their comments have gone! Also, one from a Tony Ferrero has gone as well - comment #2. I don't understand what's going on. This IP network has about 50 participants, who I hope support my work, God knows they've been 'brain washed' about it... ;-) It seems some people like my essay, and that's a good thing I think... :)

Myke. wrote on Dec. 10, 2008 @ 10:53 GMT

Hi, some people report that essays won't open automatically and so can't be read. If this happens with my essay, then right click and send the pdf to your desktop. Open it from your desktop using your pdf reader...

FQXi Administrator Kavita Rajanna wrote on Dec. 10, 2008 @ 21:02 GMT

Thanks for giving some thought to some general voting issues in this Essay Contest, which as you can imagine are tricky. In answer to the issues raised, which concern ALL ESSAYS, we would advise all entrants that the provenance of all votes is being recorded. These records for potential essay contest winners will, after voting closes, be carefully examined for consistency with the stated rules that (a) one should not vote for oneself, (b) members or authors can vote for three essays as a restricted voter, and (c) a given author can only submit one essay. Non-adherence to these rules may be grounds for disqualifying votes and/or essays from consideration.

Hi all, apparently you must use Adobe Reader 6.0 after the pdf file is saved to your desktop by right clicking, etc...

To answer Paul and Robert, I don't know how long there has been a problem with the pdf, but the above seems to fix it across several platforms...

amrit wrote on Dec. 28, 2008 @ 15:26 GMT

Eleven steps to right understanding of time

1. Motion of objects and particles do not happen in time, it happens in space only.

2. Time is what we measure with clocks: with clocks we measure duration and numerical order of massive objects and elementary particles motion into space.

3. As a “fourth” coordinate of space-time time is a “coordinate of motion”, it describes motion of massive bodies and particles into space.

4. Space-time is a math model only; space-time does not exist as a physical reality.

5. In a model of space-time we describe motion of objects and particles into space.

6. Space itself is atemporal.

7. Humans experience atemporal space as a present moment.

8. Past and future exists only in the mind; physical past and future do not exist.

9. Time as a coordinate of motion in atemporal space exists only when we measure it.

10. Time as a “coordinate of motion” is not elementary physical quantity as energy matter, space and motion are.

11. Universe is an atemporal phenomenon.

Anonymous wrote on Dec. 28, 2008 @ 23:54 GMT

Hi "amrit" so you've read my essay and agree that everything is built up from the spatial-locations that cascade from the timeless fractal state. This is a good first step to understanding how the universe functions...

Getting to grips with the underlying complexity of the algorithm that generates the mass-line spectrum will reveal how SCI-space emerges and all mass appears as a spin-charge interaction label, etc...

That everything is associated to the spin-two Calabi-Yau entity at the Planck mass is a key discovery, which is why I gave it such prominence...

Yours is an interesting presentation that unites geometrical constructions to the fundamental particles as well as indicate that time is the sorce ofn everything we observe in both the visible and dark matter of the Universe. The concept of Pi gets the strength through its unique use in explaining the various mass numbers. The discreteness of time has been brought out against the normal attitude of continuous flow in order to explain the cosmology of the Universe. i admit that your explanation is simple enough to be appreciated by a large number of viewers. May i however request you, sorry so late, to identify some experiments that will identify the results with your postulations uniquely!

Spatial asymmetry accordingly generate mass and time

'asymmetry' generates energy through the curvature changes in space/time picture. it is a plausible factor as my essay prospectives indicate too.

Anonymous wrote on Jan. 3, 2009 @ 16:29 GMT

Hi Nath, thanks for your comments and questions...

Besides my many predictions regarding fundamental particles; there are those that intimately concern the weak force and the Higgs sector, as noted in my essay. The non-detection of gravity waves is a substantial prediction. First annunciated to Professor David Blair in 1979 when we worked together on his gravity wave detection experiments at UWA. Also, the detail related to supernova triggering through my discovery of gravitational hysteresis at the Planck scale is another testable prediction, but one that requires observation of a supernova just before it happens; of course, with a large orbital companion to be able to measure its gravitational signature, mass ratio, etc...

My discovery of the correct Calabi-Yau entity at the spin-two Planck mass is yet another remarkable breakpoint for further study, which leads to physical elucidation. The belief that the Planck realm is not open to 'physical' study is false. It can be precisely simulated by my algorithm. The large image of it in my essay was given to allow 'off-screen' measurements to be taken by those who are able to see its dramatic geometric consequences. I hope Ed Witten is reading this! Given that that image took up so much valuable page space, when there was so much to write about, means it should be taken very seriously...

The fact that all the known fundamental particle properties emerge from the algorithm presisely in keeping with the experimental data (using only one scaling parameter) is remarkable and verifiable by anyone who cares to run my algorithm; as described in my essay. I believe that this is a first! Never before has any theory been able to return the exact particle data, including masses, from a single parameter approach. That should stands as sufficient evidence for my work's profound correctness, at least in my opinion it should...

i am sorry that i forgot to come back to your essay post to see your excellent response to my previous post. i feel happy to see that you have indicated what one needs to do in experimental cosmology. i myself believe that such experiments if conducted from space farther away from Earth may bring many new informations to elucidate the picture we have built thus far in Physics and Cosmology. I am in favor of such investigations over the LBC experiment at Geneva, being done look at possible Higgs Boson .. and other fundamnetal particles. Nature through our Universe has all the signatures of such events provided we can go farther and closer to the origin of the Universe, the first billion years. Thus far , expts have approached objects that were just 12 billion years back. The period from first half billion to 1 1/2 billion years from the Big Bang point is significant , but experimentally difficult to approach. Many thanks for your details, Myke. All my best wishes for further progress in your line of study!

Indeed, there is much that still needs to be done to get through to the true fundamentals of physics and cosmology. I try to contribute, but a full contribution needs a kind helping hand. I need to hire a team of programmers to get my algorithm out there in its full particle simulation mode as the first generation low-cost table-top bump hunter...

I wonder how long it will take for the 'professionals' to see the light?

Name & fame are not important, these die with our body. Our actions and their consequences live thereafter too.

Yes, i am with you that it is important to geta team associated with you. You are in Austria or Australia, i am not sure. For me it is the stage of my life that prevents me to seek a team, as i am a retiree of over 15 years standing. Even for the patents i got in the past 2-3 years, i need infrastructure and youngsters to implement the same into commercial products. i wish i could have done such things when i was in active service and infrastructure was available to me. i don't know your current status/situation, but i do feel your alogrithm needs expansion and application to solve the many unsolved problems, my very best wishes and all good luck!

Narendra wrote on Jan. 16, 2009 @ 02:47 GMT

Dear Myke,

True fundamentals in science evolve naturally as science progresses. One can only do one's best and i wish you all the luck in getting a team working with your algorithm soon.

Just learned that a Physics professor at Imperial College, London has developed a new theory ' Faster Than the Speed of Light to understand the early Universe. He calls it 'Varying Speed of Light' or VSL Theory- Dr. Joao Magneijo. Things go on evolving towards better and better understanding.